"Andrew Dunstan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>>> * support for Tutorial D as an alternative to SQL. It would be great
>>> for educational purposes.
> This strikes me as something that belongs in a research project, not in the
> core, at least for now.
For better or worse, Postgres is a SQL engine; I can't imagine trying
to support two different query languages at the same time. When the
Berkeley guys ripped out PostQUEL and put in SQL, it was a major change,
and we are *still* trying to clean up leftover baggage from having
originally used a different language with different query semantics.
Even if Tutorial D were the greatest thing since sliced bread,
supporting it alongside SQL sounds totally impractical.
(Reality check: even supporting Oracle's flavor of SQL alongside ours
would be an incredible pain. Ask the EnterpriseDB guys how they're
doing on that ...)
regards, tom lane
---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 2: Don't 'kill -9' the postmaster
